Talk:Ohio State Route 257

Ohio State Route 257 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 25, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

United States: Ohio Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ohio portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio.

U.S. Roads: State highways / Ohio Mid‑importance

	U.S. roads portal This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.U.S. RoadsWikipedia:WikiProject U.S. RoadsTemplate:WikiProject U.S. RoadsU.S. road transport articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Topics	U.S. state highways
Locations	Ohio
	This article has a map. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.
	This article has a junction list compliant with the Manual of Style on road junction lists.
	This article has a KML file. If the file has an error, please work with the Maps department to correct it.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ohio State Route 257/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TCN7JM (talk · contribs) 16:00, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This has been sitting here for almost a month, and I hate when that happens, so I will review this either later today or tomorrow. T C N7JM 16:00, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I should note that I am delaying this review a bit because the nominator is on vacation and notified me on IRC that he most likely would not be able to respond. T C N7JM 06:41, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I might be wrong, but using "would be" in the present tense like the article does in the route description doesn't seem right.
Changed with "is".—CycloneIsaac–E-Mail 19:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have nothing against using the traffic volume table, but did you mean to stick the 0.486 value on the end instead of near the beginning where it belongs?
Nah, it's suppose to be there.—CycloneIsaac–E-Mail 19:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These are the only comments I have. This is going on hold. T C N7JM 12:33, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Passing. T C N7JM 22:14, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced reference[edit]

The ref removed meets the qualification, "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." It is also well sourced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plmerry (talk • contribs) 18:56, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]